Effects of Plant Density and Cow Manure Levels on Growth Criteria of Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Cultivars under Mashhad Climatic Conditions

Document Type : Scientific - Research


1 Ferdowsi University of mashhad

2 Ferdowsi University of Mashhad


Legumes after cereals are the second source of human food and in Iran they are the second most important food after the wheat. Legumes protein is four times as much as that of grains and 10 to 20 times as much as that of glandular plants. In addition, beans are planted in Iran in a wide area and knowing optimal farming factors can be an important step in increasing them.
One of the most important factors determining the yield of cowpea (Vign asinensis L.) is appropriate plant density. Plant density defines the number of plants per square meter, which in turn determines the area available to each individual plant. For most crops, plant density has a major influence on biomass, crop yield and economic profitability.
In common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), plant density can affect canopy architecture, light conversion efficiency, duration of vegetative growth, dry matter production, seed yield and ultimately, the economic productivity of a crop. Therefore, optimizing plant density, which may be defined by both the number of plants per unit area and the arrangement of plants on the ground, is a pre-requisite for obtaining higher productivity of common bean. However, the other yield components such as number and weight of pods and seeds per plant and 100- seed weight which are established at a later stage in the course of the crop cycle are significantly affected by environmental conditions. Furthermore, the contribution efficiency of these components in the final seed yield is also associated with the number of plants per unit area. Therefore, varying plant density may be a viable alternative to manipulate the productivity of bean under different environmental conditions through their changes in physiological processes. Madani et al. (2008) showed that plant density had significant effect on LAI and shoot dry weight of bean. Moeinit et al. (2009) reported the increase in common bean seed yield with the increase in plant density. Another important factor determining growth indices is manure. Integrated supply of nutrient to plants through planned combinations of organic and inorganic sources is becoming an increasingly important aspect of environmentally sound agriculture. There are reports which show that the application of manure on bean has improved yield and growth indices.
Materials and methods
In order to study the effects of plant density and cow manure levels on four common bean cultivars an experiment was conducted as a factorial arrangement based on complete randomized block design with three replications at the Agricultural Research Station, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, during two growing seasons of 2011-2012 and 2013-2014. The experimental treatments were plant density in three levels (13.13, 20 and 40 plants.m-2), three cow manure levels (0, 15 and 30 kg.ha-1) and four common bean cultivars (Gholi, Akhtar, Naz and D-81083). The plot size was 5×2 meter and the spacing between rows was 50 cm and the seeds were planted in four rows. In order to measure the growth indices, the destructive samplings were carried out every 10 days from 50 cm of row in each plot. All common bean plants were harvested by cutting at the soil surface. Dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR), net assimilation rate (NAR), of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) were measured and calculated accordingly. Plants were then divided into leaf and stem. The areas of green leaves were measured using a Delta-T leaf area meter (Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, England). Then the samples, including stems and leaves were dried in a forced-air oven at 80 ˚C for 48 h and after witch total dry matter (TDM) was measured. The leaf area data was divided to ground area and the leaf area index (LAI) was obtained. The LAI data was fitted to the Gaussian equation (Equation 1) to predict the LAI of common bean in growth season:
x (t)= a . Exp {-0.5((x-x0)/b) ^2} (Equation 1)
Where is the time (day), x (t): predicted LAI; a, the maximum LAI during growth season; b is the time that after that the LAI increase exponentially; x0, the time (day) that common bean had the highest LAI.
The sigmoid equation (Equation 2) was fitted to the TDM data and by derivation from this equation, the crop growth rate (CGR) (Equation 3) and relative growth rate (Equation 4) were obtained (Steinmaus and Norris, 2002):
W (t) = a / 1+ exp {-b (t-m)} (Equation 2)
CGR = b. w (t) {1-(w (t)/a)} (Equation 3)
RGR = b {1-(w (t)/a)} (Equation 4)
Where t is the time (day), W(t), common bean dry matter at time t; a, the maximum total dry matter of common bean; b, the slope of increasing the dry matter; m, the time that common bean had the maximum growth rate and CGR is crop growth rate. The regression analysis was performed by SAS 9.1 and the graphs were prepared by Excel.
Results and discussion
The results showed that during the days after planting in all treatments, leaf area index first increased until 56 days after planting and then it had a descending trend. The highest slope of leaf area increase is related to plant density (40 plants.m-2). Although, decreasing plant density from 40 plants.m-2 to 13.13 decreased LAI 29% plants.m-2. The results revealed that the maximum of LAI was obtained in cow manure (30 t.ha-1) (2.57). LAI for four common bean cultivars were different. The cultivar Goli with 2.61 had the greatest LAI. Crop growth rate (CGR) in all treatments first increased slightly and then increased more quickly until 56 days after planting. Then CGR decreased with a sharp slope. Gradual increase of CGR at first was due to insufficient vegetative meristems; however, as the plant canopy was completed and due to more efficient application of light and increase of leaf area the rate of CGR increased quickly so that it was maximized and then it decreased due to increase of interplant competition, decrease of light penetration into canopy photosynthetic organs’ getting late and also assimilates mobilization into grains. In this study the lowest rate of plant growth recorded during growth stage belonged to 13.13 plant.m-2 density, 0 t.ha-1cow manure and Akhtar cultivar) (8.32 g.m-2.day, 7.90 g.m-2.day and 4.26 g.m-2.day, respectively). Relative growth rate decreased as the plant age increased so that at the end of growth season RGR was close to zero. At the beginning of growth stage, due to more penetration of light into the canopy and less shadow of the leaves on each other and the less respiration, RGR is more and its reduction slope is less. As time passes and vegetative and reproductive organs grow more, the shadow of leaves on each other increases and RGR decreases. Plant density with 40 plants.m-2 shows the highest primary RGR and the plant density with 3.13 plants.m-2 shows the lowest one. The highest RGR in the 56th day has been related to 30 t.ha-1cow manure.
We can conclude that indeterminate common bean cultivars such as Goli and Naz showed the greatest growth rate and these findings indicate that the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) crop has the ability to alter plant size and canopy structure in response to changes in plant density. These strategies can be used as cultural methods to reduce the competitive ability of weeds and maintain common bean growth at acceptable levels. However, there is a need to evaluate numerous common bean cultivars in different locations and years to find cultivars with high competitive ability and stability in yield.
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the project by Vice President for Research and Technology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.


Al-Ramamneh, E.A.D.M. 2009. Plant growth strategies of Thymus vulgaris L. in response to population density. Industrial Crops and Products 30: 389-394.
Alam, M.S., Cui, Z.J., Yamagishi, T., and Ishii, R. 2001. Grain yield and related physiological characteristics of rice plants (Oryza sativa L.) inoculated with free-living rhizobacteria. Plant Production Science 4: 126-130.
Amini, R.A., and Fateh, E. 2011. Effect of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) on growth indices and yield of red kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science 20: 100-124. (In Persian with English Summary)
Andrade, F.H., Calvino, P.A., Ciriloc, A., and Barbieria, P. 2002. Yield responses to narrow rows depend on increased radiation interception. Agronomy Journal 94: 975-980.
Anis, R., Wells, R., and Thomas, G. 2001. Reproductive allocation of Virginia-type peanut cultivars bred for yield in North Carolina. Crop Science 41: 72-77.
Arancon, N., Edwards, C.A., Bierman, P., Welch, C., and Metzger, J.D. 2004. Influences of vermicomposts on field strawberries: 1. Effects on growth and yields. Bioresource Technology 93: 145-153.
Aroiee, H., and Omidbaigi, R. 2004. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer on productivity of medicinal pumpkin. Acta Horticulturae 629: 415-419.
Asadi Rahmani, H., Afshar, M., Khavazi, K., Nourgholipour, F., and Otadi, A. 2005. Effect of Common bean nodulating rhizobia native to Iranian soils on the yield and quality of bean. Journal of Water and Soil 19(2): 215-223. (In Persian with English Summary)
Asghari, J., Zareei, B., and Barzegari, M. 2006. Effect of plant density and planting pattern on growth parameters and yield of two promising corn hybrids (Zea mays L.). Journal of Agriculture Science Technology 20: 123-133. (In Persian with Persian Summary)
Babaeian, M., Javaheri, M., and Asgharzade, A. 2012. Effect of row spacing and sowing date on yield and yield components of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). African Journal of Microbiology Research 6(20): 4340-4343.
Bagheri, A., Mahmoudi, A., and Ghezeli, F. 2001. Common Bean: Research for Crop Improvement. Jihad Daneshgahi Publication, Mashhad, Iran 556 pp. (In Persian)
Bredemeier, C. 2005. Laser-induced chlorophyll fluorescence sensing as a tool for site-specific nitrogen fertilizer evaluation under controlled environmental and field conditions in wheat and maize. PhD thesis. Technical University of Munich, Germany 219 pp.
Bourd, J. 2001 Reduce Logding for soybean low plant population is related to light quality. Crop Science 41: 379-384.
Bovetchko, S.M., and Tewaris, J.P. 2009. Root colonization of different hosts by the vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus dimorphicum. Plant and Soil 129: 131-136.
Conley, P.S., Binning, L.K., Boerboom, C.M., and Stoltenberg, D.E. 2002. Estimating giant foxtail cohort productivity in soybean based on weed density, leaf area, or volume. Weed Science 50: 72-78.
Deka, B.H.P., and Dileep, K.B.S. 2002. Plant disease suppression and growth promotion by a fluorescent Pseudomonas strain. Folia Microbiology 47: 137-143.
Dorri, H.R. 2008. Bean Agronomy. Publication Series of Research Center of Bean, Khomein, Iran 46 pp. (In Persian)
Enyi, B.A.C. 2007. Effect of plant population on growth and yield of soybean. The Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 18: 131-138.
Fallah, S., Ehsanzadeh, P., and Daneshvar, M. 2005. Grain yield and yield components in three chickpea genotypes under dryland conditions with and without supplementary irrigation at different plant densities in Khorram-Abad, Lorestan. Iranian Journal of Agriculture Science 36(3): 719-731. (In Persian with English Summary)
FAO. 2013. FAO Hunger map. (www.fao.org)
Faraji, H., Gholizadeh, S., Owliaiee, H.R., and Azimi Gandomani, M. 2010. Effect of plant density on grain yield of three spotted bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars in Yasouj condition. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 1(1): 43-50. (In Persian with English Summary)
Gandjali, A., Malekzadeh, S., and Bagheri, A.R. 2000. Effect of plant population density and planting pattern on trend of growth indices of chickpea (Cicer arientium L.) in Neishabour region. Agriculture Science Technology 14(2): 33-41. (In Persian with English Summary)
Ghanbari-Bonjar, A., and Lee, H.C. 2003. Intercropped wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and bean (Vicia faba L.) as whole-crop forage: effect of harvest time on forage yield and quality. Grass and Forage Science 58: 28-36.
Gholami, A., Shahsavani, S., and Nezarat, S. 2009. The effect of plant growth promoting chickpea in dryland conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 2(3): 63-72. (In Persian with English Summary)
Golchin, A., Mousavi, S.F., Ghasemi Golezani, K., and Saba, J. 2008. Relationship between plant density and grain yield of three pinto bean cultivars at different sowing dates. Journal of Agricultural Science 18(1): 101-117. (In Persian with English Summary)
Golchin, A., Mousavi, S.F., Ghasemi Golezani, K., and Saba, J. 2008. Relationship between plant density and grain yield of three pinto bean cultivars at different sowing dates. Journal of Agricultural Science 18(1): 101-117. (In Persian with English Summary)
Jalilian, J., Modarres Sanavy, S.A.M., and Sabaghpour, S.H. 2005. Effect of plant density and supplementary irrigation on yield, yield components and protein content of four chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars under dry land condition. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources 12(5): 1-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
Hodges, T., and Kanemasu, E.T. 2000. Modeling daily dry matter production of winter wheat. Agronomy Journal 69: 674-678.
Holshouser, D.L., and Whittaker, J.P. 2002. Plant population and row spacing effects on early soybean instruction emission agronomy. Agronomy Journal 94: 603-611.
Isik, M., Tekeoglu, M., Onceler, Z., and Cakir, S. 2001. The effect of plant population density on dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Anatolia Agriculture Research Institute. Available in: //tagem.gov.trengprojelers97/21.html
Kahrarian, B., and Fatemi, R. 2005. The effect of row spacing and planting space on the grain yield in white bean cv. Daneshkadeh. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 6(4): 438-440. (In Persian with English Summary)
Karimi, M.M., and Siddique, K.H. 2000; Crop growth and relative growth rate of old and modern wheat cultivars. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 42: 13-20.
Koocheki, A., Tabrizi, L., Jahani, M., Mohammad-Abadi, A.A., and Mahdavi Damghani, A. 2009. Performance of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) under different planting patterns and high corm density. 3rd International Symposium on Saffron. Forthcoming Challenges in Cultivation, Research and Economics. 20-23 May, Korokos, Kozani, Greece.
Lopez-Billido, F.J., Lopez- Billido, R.J., Khalil, S.K., and Lopez-Billido, L. 2008. Effect of planting date on winter Kabuli chickpea growth and yield under rainfed Mediterranean condition. Agronomy Journal 100: 957- 967.
Madani, H., Shirzadi, M.H., and Darini, F. 2008. Effect of plant density on yield and yield components of vigna and tepary local beans germplasm in Jiroft, Iran. New Findings in Agriculture 3(1): 93-104. (In Persian with English Summary)
Mal, A.L., and Patidar, M. 2004. Effect of farmyard manure, fertility levels and bio-fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Indian Journal of Agronomy 49: 117-120.
Malakoti, M. 2005. Constant agronomy and enhance yield by optimum use of fertilizer in Iran. Instruction Emission Agronomy. (In Persian)
Malik, V.S., Swanton, C., and Michaels, T.E. 1993. Interference of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars, row spacing and seeding density with annual weeds. Weed Science 41: 62-68.
Mazaheri, M., and Chghakhor, A. 2011. Effect of plant density and row spacing on some morphological characteristics, yield and protein content of two chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Agronomy Science 6: 97-107. (In Persian with English Summary)
Mishra, A., Prasad, K., and Rai, G. 2010. Effect of biofertilizer inoculations on growth and yield of dwarf field pea (Pisum sativum L.) in conjunction with different dose of chemical fertilizers. Journal of Agronomy 9(4): 163-168.
Mohamadian, M., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., Zarghani, H., and Yanegh, A. 2013. Study the effect of intercropping of three sesame genotypes on morphological and physiological indices. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 11(3): 421-429. (In Persian with Persian Summary)
Moeini, M.R., Nazarkakhki, H., Razazi, A., and Kamel Shikharjeh, M. 2009. Survey of yield and yield component in three common bean cultivars in cropping pattern. Journal of Agrisearch 1(2): 78-92. (In Persian with English Summary)
Moaveni, P., Aliabadi Farahani, H., and Maroufi, K. 2011. Effects of sowing date and planting density on quantity and quality features in thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.). Advances in Environmental 5(7): 1706-1710.
Naseri, R., Rahimi, M.J., Siyadat, S.A., and Mirzaei, A. 2015. The effects of supplementary irrigation and different plant densities on morphological traits, yield and its components and protein content of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in Sirvan region in Ilam province. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(1): 78-91. (In Persian with English Summary)
Ngouajio, M., McGiffen, J.M.E., and Hembree, K.J. 2001. Tolerance of (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivar to velvetleaf interference. Weed Science 49: 91-98.
Ni, H., Moody, K., Robles, R.P., Paller, J.C.E., and Lales, J.S. 2000. Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) plant traits conferring competitive ability against weeds. Weed Science 48: 200-204.
Ouzuni Douji, A.A., Esfahani, M., Samizadeh Lahiji, H.A., and Rabiei, M. 2008. Effect of planting pattern and plant density on growth indices and radiation use efficiency of apetalous flowers and petalled flowers rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Iran. Journal of Crop Science 9: 400-328. (In Persian with Persian Summary)
Parsa, M., and Bagheri, A. 2008. Pulses. Mashhad University Press, Mashhad, Iran 523 pp. (In Persian)
Parvizi, S., Amirnia, R., Bernosy, I., Paseban Islam, B., Hasanzadeh Ghorttapeh, A., and Raeii, Y. 2011. Evaluation of different plant densities effects on rate and process of grain filling, yield and yield components in varieties of dry bean. Journal of Plant Production 18(1): 69-87. (In Persian with English Summary)
Parvizi, S., Amirnia, R., Bernosy, I., Paseban Islam, B., Hasanzadeh Ghorttapeh, A., and Raeii, Y. 2011. Evaluation of different plant densities effects on rate and process of grain filling, yield and yield components in varieties of dry bean. Journal of Plant Production 18(1): 69-87. (In Persian with English Summary)
Powelson, A., Udy, R.I., and Peachy Manath, D. 1999. Row spacing effect on while mold and snap bean yield. Horticulture Weed Control 8: 220-227.
Qin, T.C., and li, Z.G. 2002. Studies of inheritance of kemal growth characters and their relation to giel characters maize. Acta Agronomical Sinica 17(3): 183-191
Rabiee, M., and Jilani, M. 2010. Effect of row spacing and seed rate on yield and yield component of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars in Guilan province. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 6(1): 9-20. (In Persian with English Summary)
Rezaeyan Zadeh, E., Parsa, M., Ganjali, A., and Nezami, A. 2011. Responses of yield and yield components of chickpea cultivars (Cicer arietinum L.) to supplementary irrigation in different phenology stages. Journal of Water and Soil 25: 1080-1095. (In Persian with English Summary)
Rosalind, A.B., Purcell, L.C., and Vories, E.D. 2000. Short season soybean yield compensation in response to population and water regime. Crop Science 40: 1070-1078.
Saindon, G., Huang, G., and Kozub, H.C. 1995. White-mold avoidance and agronomic attributes of upright common beans growth at multiple planting densities in narrow rows. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 120: 843-853.
Shahraki, M., Dahmarede, M., Khamari, E., and Asgharzade, A. 2016. Effects of Azotobacter and Azospirillum and Levels of Manure on Quantitative and Qualitative Traits of Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.). Journal of Agroecology 8(1): 59-69. (In Persian with English Summary)
Shukla, K.N., and Dixit, R.S. 2000. Nutrient and plant population management in summer gram. Indian Journal of Agronomy 41: 78-83.
Singh, D., Chand, S., Anvar, M., and Patra, D. 2003. Effect of organic and inorganic amendment on growth and nutrient accumulation by isabgol (Plantago ovata) in sodic soil under greenhouse conditions. Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plant Sciences 25: 414-421.
Sirait, Y., Pill, W.G., and Kee, W.E. 2002. Lima bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) response to irrigation and plant population densities. Horticultural Science 29(2): 71-73.
Soltani, N., and Sikkema, P. 2005. White bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) tolerance to preplant- incorporated herbicides. Weed Biology and Management 5: 35-38.
Steinmaus, S.J., and Norris, R.F. 2002. Growth analysis and canopy architecture of velvetleaf grown under light conditions representative of irrigated Mediterranean-type agroecosystems. Weed Science 50: 42-53.
Talei, A., and Sayadian, K. 2000. Effect of supplementary irrigation and nutrition requirement of chickpea in dryland conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 2(3): 63-72. (In Persian with English Summary)
Tharp, B.E., and Kells, J. 2001. Effect of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays L.) population and row spacing on light interception, corn yield, and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.) growth. Weed Technology 15: 413-418.
Tomati, U., Grappelli, A., and Gall, E. 1987. The hormone-like effect of earthworm casts on plant growth. Biology and Fertility of Soils 5: 288-294.
Torabi Jafroudi, A., Hasanzadeh, A.A., and Fayaz moghadam, A. 2007. Effect of plant population on some morph physiological characteristics of two common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 20(1): 63-71. (In Persian with English Summary)
Troeh, Z.I., and Loynachan, T.E. 2003. Endomycorrhozal fungal survival in continuous corn, soybean, and fallow. Agronomy Journal 95: 224-230.
Vessey, J.K. 2003. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil 255: 571- 586.
Wilson, R.G., Wick, G.A., and Fenster, C.R. 2008. Weed control in field beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) in Western Nebraska. Weed Science 28: 295-299.
Wolf, D., Henderson, W., Chsiao, D.W., and Alvino, A. 2008. Interactive water and nitrogen effects on senescence of maize: I. Leaf area duration nitrogen distribution, and yield. Agronomy Journal 80: 859-864.